"Techies concerned over NSA surveillance will march in D.C., proclaiming ‘Stop Watching Us’"

The NSA controversy has become the defining issue among those that are technologically savvy. A protest against the NSA's spy programs is scheduled for Saturday near the Capitol and is expected to gather thousands of followers. The group in charge of the protest, Stop Watching Us, has stated that their protest welcomes any supporters. Stop Watching Us's motivation for protesting lies in the fact that the government simply has too much information at its disposal. One protestor even stated: “Twenty years ago, if they collected this information, they couldn’t do much with it.”

I personally believe that any protest against the NSA is completely justified at this point. The fact that such spy programs existed in the first place already trampled the Constitution, but at least the government was honest about such privacy invasions during the Bush administration. However, President Obama not only went against his campaign promise of ending such programs, he expanded them, which is a horrible crime towards the American people. The term fascism is thrown around frequently with issues such as this but I am going to take a stance at middle ground. I am not one of those people that insists that the United States is already a fascist country, because we have not gone as far as to execute citizens for dissent. However, the direction the United States is heading towards, whatever it may be, cannot be one that is desirable when every citizen is watched constantly as if they are all criminals.

"Obama, Republicans in debt talks on two fronts"

After trying to negotiate with House Republicans about how to end the government shutdown yesterday, the Obama administration has still not made any progress. The Senate suggested reopening the government and raising the federal debt limit for three months, which were closer to Obama's terms. The White House has said that there is the potential for progress to be made in negotiations which would allow Obama to reopen the federal government and resume fixing the economy. However, this statement has not received much clarification as the House Speaker, John A. Boehner, left the Capitol without speaking to reporters.

Both sides have a different view of the meeting. The Republicans see it as a negotiations. However, Obama has publicly and privately stated that he would not negotiate over the federal debt. Today, Obama is expected to host a meeting with the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell. The House has stated that it would negotiate on November 22 but would not agree to end the shutdown.

It is a wonder how the government has come to this point. One wonders if, at this rate, the government will even reopen in the year of 2013. Our current politicians need to understand that this shutdown has the potential to cripple America's economy. However, they are too involved in disagreement and will not budge. I once saw an internet movie critic named Doug Walker that delivered this statement when reviewing a movie: "I've just realized the problem with this movie. There's no story. It's just explaining... it's just explaining and fighting, and I get enough of that from my own government!" This statement definitely holds true to this situation. At the very least, we all can at least tell our children that we lived through this event in American history and just laughed at the incompetence of our politicians.

"Obama cancels the rest of Asia trip, citing difficulties of travel during shutdown"

Last Thursday, President Obama had to recuse himself from two regional summits to handle the quarrel of the budget in Congress that shut down the federal government. Obama made this decision because the shutdown, which was completely avoidable in his eyes, is setting back the government's ability to create jobs, which would be done advocating American advancement and exporting in Asia. Obama was originally scheduled to visit the Southeast Asian countries of Indonesia, Burma, Malaysia, and the Philippines. At the regional summit, Obama was hoping to negotiate with the Russian president over the crisis in Syria and the fate of Edward Snowden, the one who leaked crucial documents about the American government's extensive wiretappings. Experts have said that Obama's inability to make it to the summit will deal a crucial blow to the Obama Administration, as the Chines will probably be able to slowly break off relations with the United States.

I believe that the effects of the government shutdown are a fascinating display of what happens when there is a lack of cooperation amongst politicians. The shutdown has also cost us the opportunity to negotiate for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free trade agreement that would include over twelve nations. If America is to truly progress as a country, our politicians must learn the meaning of the word "compromise". If our politicians do not learn to compromise in the future, then all of us will suffer. I personally predict that, given the quarrelsome state of our government, another shut down in the future is incredibly probable.

"Iran leader open to meeting Obama at a later date"

The Iranian president, Hassan Rouhani, and Barack Obama had to reschedule a meeting last Wednesday due to the Obama administration lacking a clear strategy for negotiations. Rouhani himself has stated that Iran itself actually is open to discussion of peace after 30 years of estrangement but certain conditions need to be set. Rouhani brought up the holocaust as an example, stating that while the event was horrific, it did not justify the displacement of Palestinians in Israel as a result of the Balfour Declaration.

 It has become clear at this point that there will never even be a chance at peace between America and many Middle Eastern countries until the conflict between Israel and Palestine is resolved. However, the question of how and if the conflict will be resolved is pertinent. The Israeli army's response towards terrorist attacks has always been a typical eye for an eye scenario. However, one could argue that the Palestinians are also difficult to sympathize with due to the nature of their terrorist attacks and the fact that the perpetrators of said attacks practically hide behind civilians in an effort to paint the Israeli military as one that deliberately targets civilians in their attacks. This places Iran and the United States in an awkward position when negotiating, as they both support the opposite side.

However, there is still hope for negotiations involving nuclear power, as President Rouhani has the support of Iran's supreme leader in declaring the possibility of scheduling such negotiations at the United Nations.

9/11

September 11, 2001 is a date that will forever invoke fear into the hearts of the American people. On this day, thousands of people died from four suicide bombings. However, more was lost to us after that date than those innocent people. After 9/11, America proceeded to pass the Patriot Act, which tramples on the Constitution. After this date, America would forever live in fear of another terrorist attack and this would allow the government to coerce the people into choosing security over liberty.

It is important to note that while 9/11 should not be taken lightly, American citizens should still not allow themselves to be fooled into giving up what was fought for in the American Revolution. Benjamin Franklin's famous quote is as follows, "Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Franklin knew that there will always become a certain point where after fear has escalated enough, a society will gladly give up all of its freedom. The government should not use the deaths of thousands as an excuse to treat every citizen like they are already criminals. It is both insulting to the victims of the families. However, as the years pass, 9/11 has also become something more akin to a media event, as opposed to a recollection of all of those who have died.

Every year, the footage of the World Trade Center falling has been broadcast over the news. One could argue that this footage is used to remind the American people why we are still at war with the Middle East. However, every year this footage invokes more fear than mourning. I believe society prefers to live in fear of a terrorist attack more than we prefer to pay our respects to our dead. I believe the media could take the recollection of 9/11 in a slightly different route considering the one who orchestrated the attacks has been dead for almost three years. However, one could also argue that that is the nature of society. Fear is a more powerful emotion than sadness and the media uses this to their advantage.

Review of "The Fifteen Biggest Lies in Politics"

"The Fifteen Biggest Lies in Politics" was written by Major Garrett, a reporter, and Timothy Penny, a former Conservative Democrat. The book claims to be a self defense manual for voters by allowing them to see past fifteen dangerous lies used by politicians to sway said voters. The book follows a style of generally presenting a political myth/debate and deconstructing both sides of said issue. "The Fifteen Biggest Lies in Politics" is certainly a well researched book as one can ascertain by the evidence that Garrett and Penny present when debunking an argument. The book has both issues and strengths in its presentation, some of its research and its consistency.

"The Fifteen Biggest Lies in Politics", as stated, is certainly well researched but the manner in which it is presented can be hard to follow for readers who have not yet taken an economics class. The book also has moments in the second third where the writers seemed to have focused more or so on providing information in a flat manner rather than a manner that is interesting to read, such as the case with the weakest chapter, "The Budget Will Be Balanced by the Year 2002". That is not to say, that the information will not be enlightening to some, but it is to say, that it will be difficult for most to swallow at times. I personally found the first third of the book to be the strongest, as it was able to keep my interest the entire read, while the second third dragged, and the third was an inconsistent blend of the first two third's positive and negative qualities.

The book, while generally well-researched, has obvious moments, even in the exceptional first third, of political bias, in the chapter revolving around religion and politics. As I stated in my second blog, both authors seem to let their own faith cloud their judgement as to the fact that while religion has certainly aided certain political morality in cases such as abolition, civil rights, and feminism, it was also used as justification to keep these movements in check by radicals. However, the most impressive research in "The 15 Biggest Lies in Politics" was in the abortion and gun control chapters. In the abortion chapter, statistics were shown that implicated both the pro-choice movement (partial birth abortions increasing over time) and the pro-life movement (thousands of violent cases against abortion clinic doctors). Overall, the research of the book, with the exception of the chapter about religion and politics, was well rounded.

As I stated in the second paragraph, the book lacks consistency. After the first third of the book, I was disappointed tremendously with the second third as the book went from a well researched, critique of both sides of an issue to a well researched critique of one side of an issue. The final third held my interest in certain parts but by the end, I was just wishing the style had become less ham fisted and more nonpartisan that the first, second and fourth chapters handled so well. If the book had been consistent, it would have been a superior political book but as it stands, it is average at worst.

Would I recommend this book? No. The second third of "The 15 Biggest Lies in Politics" simply drags the book down due to horrible pacing. That is my review of "The 15 Biggest Lies in Politics".

Reflecting on the last half of "The 15 Biggest Lies in Politics"

The last half of "The 15 Biggest Lies in Politics" covered the misconceptions surrounding voting donations, a balance budget, social security, medicare, tax cuts, education, the environment, Republicans' governmental beliefs and Democrats' compassion. The authors of "The 15 Biggest Lies in Politics" covered these issues primarily in a more critical light than previous chapters, as opposed to listing the pros and cons to the opposing side, such as the first third of the book regarding cases such as abortion and gun control. However, I am not as inclined to make as many judgements about certain issues described in this half of the book due to my limited knowledge on more than half of said topics. Instead I shall issue a summary of the topics covered in the chapters which I have more of a basic understanding of. The chapters I shall summarize are the ones that discuss education, the environment, and the Democrat's compassion.

The issue of education in America is covered with incredible criticism. The authors describe the American educational system as one of extreme inferiority to the one that was present thirty years before publication. The authors describe this generation as individuals who come out of high school barely knowing much about the American Revolution, how a bill becomes a law in Washington D.C., or how to identify their own state's politicians. The public school is also described as in general, an atmosphere of fear, with students and children fearing hostility from other more violent students. Major Garrett and Timothy Penny outline this by displaying statistics of an increasing number of parents seeking alternatives to public education such as private schools and/or home schooling due to the poor education and the lack of safety in public schools. Both authors point out the pointless nature of having to pay taxes for public schools due to the increasing number of students seeking alternate schools.

The issue of the environment is covered in a rather gray fashion. On the one hand, the authors outline circumstances where larger industry has been hazardous to the lives of citizens, such as the case in Niagara Falls, New York in 1977 when leaked chemicals poisoned residents and in Elizabeth, New Jersey also in 1977 when forty thousand drums of dangerous chemicals exploded and caught fire. However, it is also stressed the amount of environmental paranoia the EPA can stir up, such as seizing land from farmers and ranchers under the Endangered Species Act. Both authors encourage the reader to care for the environment but to also hold the Environmental Protection Agency to a higher standard than they currently are.

The myth of the compassion of Democrats is deconstructed in the final chapter of the book. The stereotype is deconstructed as one fueled by pure nostalgia. The authors deconstruct said stereotype by pointing out that while Democrats have started programs in favor of supporting the weak, they have also over the course of time abandoned sustaining such programs in favor of increasing government size and factoring in too many citizens into their programs to properly run said programs.  The authors point out that this is not compassion, it is merely cowardice.

My prediction about the book was proven right for the most part. I did observe a more critical view of both sides of an argument, such as in the case of the chapter discussing the Environmental Protection Agency. I cannot make a judgement on bias in most of the other chapters due to my lack of knowledge involving issues such as the economy.